CA, when I read text like what you posted, I notice that it's so vaguely formulated that it's largely up to the observer to try and give it meaning. He says the universe is a black hole with an event horizon, yet for what we know based on observation, our universe is expanding. The collective mass in the universe has no event horizon; light and matter is still travelling outwards from the big bang. If the universe is a black hole, where is it? And where is it's event horizon? He also freely mixes abstract ideas of spirituality with real macrophysics, suggesting that people who go on inward journeys become denser and have more gravity than others and that an example of such a person is Jesus. If people are stars, then these are equivalent of supernovas and this makes people gravitate towards them and makes them capable of f.ex starting religions.

If getting more enlightened also makes you heavier, then that sounds like a testable hypothesis to me, but I doubt you'd find evidence for it if you looked All in all, it looks like complete bollocks formulated by someone arrogant enough to believe his vague and uneducated hypothesis about how the universe works - devoid of real substance or observational evidence and littered with the abuse of scientific jargon - is something worth teaching people. Believing it would be an excercise in stupidity as it would teach you to accept outlandish claims from a very poor source.

You should really trip more, dude.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crash_override

I'll admit that I am confused about the "nothing begins, nothing ends" part of the theory. As well as the "universe, within a universe". If these are true, then wouldn't it be true that not only would there always be something bigger in existence to find if you looked long enough, but the same could be said for smaller objects within both our world and the universe as a whole. If the entity that we call "the universe" is just a smaller object within a larger one, why couldn't there be another smaller "universe" within what we are existing in at this very moment? If we are even existing at all.

Furthermore, if any of this is true, then why are we still calling things that we theorize are not alone in making up "the universe", universe's themselves?

Huh? The theory says everything is a point. The notion of bigger/smaller is an illusion created by perspective. Points all the way down, points all the way up. Every point is the same size, because all points are sizeless. That's true equality. You and I might be different configurations of points, but we're still both points, and hence we are one. Be happy.